Search Climate Insights Directory

The SDG16DI 2020 Global Report argues that official data from National Statistical Offices (NSOs) are often insufficient, unreliable, or unavailable for monitoring SDG16 targets, particularly regarding conflict-related deaths, corruption, and press freedom. It highlights the critical role of 'non-official data'—produced by NGOs and academic institutions—in filling these gaps. The report provides case studies on sex-disaggregated data for violent deaths, trade-related illicit financial flows in developing nations, corruption and vote-buying in Latin America and the Caribbean, and the use of expert-based indices to measure representative decision-making. It also notes that the COVID-19 pandemic has exacerbated governance challenges while simultaneously reducing the capacity of NSOs to collect data.

The report finds that while energy finance disbursements in high-impact countries grew by over 61% between 2013 and 2018, they still significantly lag behind commitments, with USD 32 billion disbursed against USD 52 billion committed. Between 2002 and 2018, 58% of planned disbursements and 49% of projects experienced delays. These delays are attributed to cumbersome administrative processes, design flaws not adapted to local capacities, and limited access to local financial services.

As of 2018, approximately 80 percent of Bangladeshi households lacked access to clean cooking alternatives, with 74 percent of the rural population relying on biomass. While LPG adoption is growing at 8–10 percent annually due to government tax exemptions, other technologies like electric stoves (1.1% usage) and improved cookstoves (10% usage) face affordability and awareness barriers. Financing is heavily skewed toward improved cookstoves (ICS) via development finance institutions (DFIs) and government programs like IDCOL, while private sector participation remains limited except in the LPG sector. The proposed National Action Plan 2020–2030 estimates a total investment requirement of USD 2.9 billion to achieve 100 percent clean cooking access by 2030.

The report finds that while energy financing disbursements in High-Impact Countries grew by over 61% between 2013 and 2018, they still lag significantly behind commitments, with $32 billion disbursed against $52 billion committed. These delays affect 49% of energy projects in HICs, driven by administrative burdens and poor project design. The document argues that an annual increase of $45 billion in disbursements is needed by 2030 to meet SDG7 goals.

The 2020 report by Sustainable Energy for All highlights a significant and growing gap between the investment needed and the actual funding provided for universal energy access. In 2018, only 16 billion USD was recorded for electrification in high-impact countries (HIC), far below the 41 billion USD annual requirement. Clean cooking funding, while tripling to 131 million USD in 2018, remains drastically lower than the 4.53 billion USD needed annually. The report notes a concerning trend where fossil fuel investments have grown, while renewable energy and off-grid solutions remain underfunded. It calls for coordinated action between development finance institutions and governments, particularly in Sub-Saharan Africa, to reduce risks for private investors and shift away from carbon-intensive energy sources.

The 2020 report by Sustainable Energy for All reveals a widening gap between the investment needed and the finance actually committed to achieve universal energy access by 2030. In 2018, only USD 16 billion was tracked for residential electrification against a required USD 41 billion, and clean cooking finance reached USD 131 million, far below the estimated USD 4.53 billion annual need. The report highlights a geographic mismatch, where Sub-Saharan Africa accounts for 70% of people in HICs without electricity but received less than 20% of the total electricity access finance. Furthermore, the report notes a concerning trend toward fossil fuel-generated electricity and a lack of private sector investment in clean cooking. It recommends coordinated action from donor governments and DFIs in Sub-Saharan Africa, the termination of fossil fuel project financing, and the adoption of innovative business models for off-grid solutions.

The report finds that energy access finance remains critically below the levels needed for SDG7, with a significant mismatch between where finance is committed and where the need is greatest. While electricity finance increased to USD 43.6 billion in 2018, much of this was driven by fossil fuel projects in a few countries, while Sub-Saharan Africa remains chronically underfunded. Clean cooking finance is even more limited, dominated by a few large projects in Bangladesh. The report advocates for a shift toward renewable energy, the termination of fossil fuel financing, and the adoption of innovative business models and gender-responsive tracking methodologies.

The guide identifies significant energy access gaps in South Asia, with 152 million people lacking electricity and 990 million lacking clean cooking as of 2018. It proposes that governments allocate 25% of stimulus budgets to renewables and target 30% localization of clean energy value chains. Key benefits cited include a GDP multiplier where every USD 1 invested in renewables yields USD 0.93 in additional growth, and the creation of 2 to 2.5 times more jobs than fossil fuel investments. The document recommends eight enablers for this transition, including the elimination of fossil fuel subsidies, a moratorium on new coal-fired power, and the adoption of cost-reflective tariffs.

The 'science oath for the climate' is a pledge signed by nearly 600 scientists and engineers to act against catastrophic climate disruption. Signatories commit to communicating scientific evidence without compromise, resisting political or economic pragmatism when discussing the 1.5°C and 2°C Paris Agreement targets, and reducing their own carbon emissions. The document includes a comprehensive list of signatories from various global academic and professional institutions.

The document highlights a significant gap between global climate adaptation finance needs and actual commitments, noting that annual costs could reach $280 to $500 billion by 2050. It argues that marginalizing local communities from national planning leads to ineffective investments and proposes that CSOs are essential for building inclusive, transparent, and accountable finance systems. Using examples from Bangladesh and the Philippines, it demonstrates how multistakeholder engagement and citizen-led budget reporting can improve accountability. Finally, it outlines a four-step process for CSOs to build their capacity to track and evaluate adaptation finance flows.

The commentary asserts that bold climate action is not a trade-off with economic growth but an engine for it, potentially delivering $26 trillion in net global economic benefits by 2030. It advocates for 'people-centered climate action' that uses inclusive processes to unlock benefits for marginalized groups, such as recycling carbon pricing revenues to support low-income households. The text provides sector-specific opportunities in energy, urban planning, and food systems, while emphasizing that adaptation investments of $1.8 trillion could yield $7.1 trillion in benefits. It highlights real-world examples from Indonesia, Canada, and Spain to demonstrate how low-carbon transitions can reduce poverty and create millions of green jobs.

The report details a COP25 workshop focused on domestic climate finance mapping. It outlines various tracking tools—such as Climate Budget Tagging and Climate Public Expenditure and Institutional Reviews—and discusses how these initiatives help countries identify funding gaps, build investor trust, and mainstream climate goals into national budgets. The document also identifies systemic challenges, including data gaps and the need for inter-ministerial coordination, while proposing the creation of a community of practice to share best practices.

Mighty Earth calls on Sumitomo Corporation to stop financing coal power plants in Asia and importing biomass that contributes to deforestation.

The document argues that domestic budgets are often the largest source of adaptation finance in developing countries but are systematically under-utilised due to technical, institutional, and political barriers. It introduces 'climate budgeting' as a set of interventions across the budget cycle—from preparation and approval to execution and oversight—to prioritise adaptation. Through case studies in the Philippines, Afghanistan, India, and Bangladesh, the paper demonstrates how tools like climate budget tagging and climate change impact appraisal (CCIA) can increase the volume and quality of adaptation spending. It concludes with recommendations for governments to mainstream adaptation into routine public financial management and for international funders to use domestic budgets as a delivery modality for climate finance.

The document argues that falling renewable energy costs are making coal-fired power projects in South and Southeast Asia economically unviable, placing $4.8 billion of pending Japanese public financing at risk of becoming stranded assets.

The report assesses how India's LPG subsidy schemes, specifically PAHAL (DBTL) and Pradhan Mantri Ujjwala Yojana (PMUY), affect poor women. It finds that while PMUY has increased LPG access and reduced drudgery—saving women an average of one hour per day—significant inefficiencies remain. Many poor households are still left behind due to affordability and distribution barriers, while a large share of consumption subsidies benefit wealthier households. The report recommends improving targeting, reviewing the PMUY loan system to ensure affordability for the poorest, and adopting a more holistic clean cooking strategy.

The report criticizes Sumitomo Corporation for its continued investment in coal-fired power plants and its role as a leading importer of wood pellets for biomass energy. It argues that these activities drive deforestation in the US, Canada, and Vietnam, and cause severe air pollution and human rights violations in Southeast Asia. The document calls for Sumitomo to commit to a full exit from coal by 2030 and adopt a 'zero deforestation' policy for its biomass supply chain.

The toolkit argues that climate change impacts are not gender-neutral and that adaptation investments may reinforce existing inequalities if gender considerations are ignored. It provides a framework for integrating gender-responsive principles across the entire NAP process, from initial stocktaking and vulnerability assessments to implementation strategies and monitoring. The document details specific 'entry points' and 'enabling activities'—such as institutional arrangements, capacity development, and gender-responsive budgeting—to ensure that adaptation benefits are equitably distributed. It also provides a suite of six key tools, including gender analysis and multi-criteria analysis, to operationalize these principles.

The document serves as a supplement to the UNFCCC Technical Guidelines for the NAP process, offering a flexible framework to address gender inequalities in climate adaptation. It details specific 'entry points' within the NAP cycle—from launch and vulnerability assessment to implementation and monitoring—where gender considerations can be integrated. The toolkit emphasizes that climate impacts are not gender-neutral and that failing to address gender dynamics can inadvertently increase social inequality. It provides practical tools for gender analysis, inclusive facilitation, multi-criteria analysis for prioritization, and gender-responsive budgeting. Case studies from countries such as Peru, Ethiopia, Bangladesh, and Fiji illustrate the application of these principles in national planning and the use of international finance, such as the Green Climate Fund, to empower women as agents of change.

The document serves as a supplement to the UNFCCC Technical Guidelines for the NAP process, arguing that climate change impacts are not gender-neutral and that adaptation effectiveness depends on addressing gender inequalities. It outlines specific 'entry points' within the NAP cycle—from preparatory work and vulnerability assessments to implementation strategies and monitoring—where gender considerations must be integrated. The toolkit defines key concepts such as gender equality, equity, and intersectionality, and provides six essential tools: gender analysis, gender-responsive facilitation, multi-criteria analysis, gender mainstreaming, gender-responsive monitoring and evaluation (M&E), and gender-responsive budgeting. It includes case studies from countries such as Peru, Guinea, Madagascar, Burkina Faso, Fiji, Ethiopia, Bangladesh, Mexico, and Kenya to illustrate the practical application of these principles.